i think gsm due to the fact it is worldwide and more advanced and now gsm is building more not only around the world but also in the states. soon tdma will be obsolete as well as cdma which only works in some parts of the country

Obviously, your opinion is based upon bias rather than knowledge or opinion. Many countries that formally only used GSM (eg. China, Korea, Germany, UK) are replacing their GSM with CDMA. Why? Because GSM as others repeatedly in this forum have asserted has limitations especially for wireless data. The largest Wireless Network in the US (Verizonwireless--coverage not customers base)abandoned TDMA/GSM when it was BAM, GTE, and Primeco. VZW has continued to put up more towers all cdma than anyone else, and so there and they cover more different markets (130 )currently than the GSM carriers combined so the report you made in your post that coverage was greater on GSM neither holds water nor that it doesn't work everywhere (no carrier or tech...(continues)

But if CDMA is better and I am not disagreeing with that- why do most of the really cool and new phones come out for GSM first?The moto razr has been GSM for a year now and the cdma version is only just now becomming available.

Cheaper most definitely does not indicate better. GSM has more functionality in its ease of use with sim cards and its widespread use. However, everything will be shifting toward CDMA as wireless becomes more data oriented. GSM does not have anywhere near the capabilities for high speed data transfer. The current top end speeds for GSM are approx 384 Kb/s and don't show signs of speeding up without a hefty loss in efficiency as found with UMTS. With CDMA's fastest technology in widespread use, EVDO, you achieve speeds upwards of 2 Mb/s which is over 5 times as fast as its GSM counterpart. Additionally, GSM isn't truly cheaper as it is much less efficient than CDMA which can get many more phone calls per channel, meaning you need less to...(continues)

I know that. But he was asking why there are so many more phones in GSM. The main reason is because they are cheaper to manufacture... There are also more GSM users in the world because EU is all GSM/UMTS and unless the licensing changes sometimes (which i doubt) that won't change and there will always be more GSM/UMTS users.

I suppose that might happen. Right now with EV-DO rev A when it comes out the max data rate is estimated at the same as what HSDPA estimated max data rate. (give or take a few hundred kbps). EV-DV will never take over because they are planing on useing EV-DO with VoIP. EV-DV is no faster data transfer it just alowes better spectrum usage with voice.

The really technical details in everyday language can be read at http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/cell-pho ne.htm

On that link you can read about the TDMA/CDMA/GSM/FDMA standards etc and get a really good breakdown of the differences. I won't spoil the experience of letting you read for yourself trying to detail things here.

I will copy & paste from the Cellular South website:

What is CDMA?CDMA stands for Code Division Multiple Access. In plain English, it means many users can occupy the same time and frequency allocations in a given space. CDMA assigns unique codes to each communication to differentiate it from others in the same spectrum. In a world of finite spectrum resources, CDMA enables many more people to share the air...(continues)

Okay then, except for the secutity part, the rest sounds like a bunch of baloney, I had vzw for a few years and the phones I had on their network would from time to time get that echo you hear yourself echoing in the headset as you talk. that is anoying cause it is hard to hear the other person talking. On vzw I had a motorola timeport, good phone, then phones started to change more features, I switched to LG brand, that is when problems started dropping calls. I had 440, 6100, 8100, then I could not take it anymore when tech support said their was nothing they could do I switched to Alltel, Bought the razor and since then have not had to many call problems, within one year I have had alltel. I was going to swith to t-mobile cause I know a f...(continues)

We've been in too many fights over the issue. GSM has some advantages and CDMA has some advantages. Personally, I like GSM better. I like the whole GSM package more than the CDMA package. There are fans of both.

Power consumption will vary manufacturer to manufacturer, but from a technology standpoint of CDMA vs GSM, CDMA has implemented many things into its standards to save on battery performance. Read some of the other posts to see what I mean.

well you are right partially, CDMA phones will drain your battery if you are roaming. GSM dont do that. but in USA CDMA/TDMA is the better choice for south eastern states because of the topography. GSM sinals do not have that much strength in mountains or valleys. Since CDMA use a lower frequency most of the time it will work on mountians/valleys. GSM is used over almost 95% of the world. only a small percentage use CDMA in other counries.

Just because a CDMA phone is roaming, does not automatically make it analog. I've pulled analog plenty in my home area. An analog signal does drain the battery faster, but as long as your carrier's roaming partner is digital (and who isn't?), it won't drain your battery any faster. Maybe very minutely since the networks are slightly different, but still, very insignificant.

gsm is an outdated tchnology. yes it is the mobile standard for global comunications but what most people do not know is that gsm is a form of tdma time division multiple access. this means it can organize the calls so they can share one channel this also means the encription is week and as a result can even be picked up by a scanner. edge also is a good thing not bad on the data speeds but edge is the very limit of gsm technology. this is why world wide most carriers are moveing to wcdma or one of its derivatives.

cdma on the other hand is a superior technology. it was origionally developed in WWII by the allies as a way of secure comunications. in 1996 it was released for public use. cdma has 10 times the call capacity of gsm. pluse it ...(continues)

stevelvl said:gsm is an outdated tchnology. yes it is the mobile standard for global comunications but what most people do not know is that gsm is a form of tdma time division multiple access. this means it can organize the calls so they can share one channel this also means the encription is week and as a result can even be picked up by a scanner. edge also is a good thing not bad on the data speeds but edge is the very limit of gsm technology. this is why world wide most carriers are moveing to wcdma or one of its derivatives.

cdma on the other hand is a superior technology. it was origionally developed in WWII by the allies as a way of secure comunications. in 1996 it was released for public use. cdma has 10 times

Al_Swearengen said:1. GSM is no more outdated than cdma. WCDMA actually uses a GSM core and works better than it's cdma counter part.2. cdma is actually a much older technology.... going back to wwii like you said. They just never used it for cell phones.3. GSM is actually the most secure out of all the wireless technologies. It's security algorithms have been proven to be unbreakable by anyone(including governments).4. You are incorrect about GSM networks being cheaper than the cdma networks. They are actualy a little more expensive. The phones are cheaper because there is more support for gsm than cdma. It's also cheaper to update the cdma networks.4. You are once again wrong about sim cards being less secure t

GSM is not really out dated it is less then 10 years old comercially. regular CDMA is much older then that and GSM is secure in the cloning facter, if you try to clone a sim one you need the sim in hand second you cannot have more then one copy of that sim make calls or the network will kill that sim.

Anyway WCDMA is UMTS

UMTS was developed mainly for countries with GSM networks, because these countries have agreed to free new frequency ranges for UMTS networks. Because it is a new technology and in a new frequency band, whole new radio access network has to ...(continues)

GSM is not really out dated it is less then 10 years old comercially. regular CDMA is much older then that and GSM is secure in the cloning facter, if you try to clone a sim one you need the sim in hand second you cannot have more then one copy of that sim make calls or the network will kill that sim.

Anyway WCDMA is UMTS

UMTS was developed mainly for countries with GSM networks, because these countries have agreed to free new frequency ranges for UMTS networks. Because it is a new technology and in a new frequency band, whol

GSM is not really out dated it is less then 10 years old comercially. regular CDMA is much older then that and GSM is secure in the cloning facter, if you try to clone a sim one you need the sim in hand second you cannot have more then one copy of that sim make calls or the network will kill that sim.

Anyway WCDMA is UMTS

UMTS was developed mainly for countries with GSM networks, because these countries have agreed to free new frequency ranges for UMTS networks. Because it is a new technolog

Just because you know the ESN number doesn't mean you can use the phone. The phone doesn't brodcast it's security codes (which change every call) untill it has connected to a tower. Once it has connected it a tower it will change it's frequency and even it's bandwith up to 60 times a sec so that the most number of phones can get onto that phone. That is why no one has ever been able to hack into a phone call. I have heard of rumors of occasion for cloneing but i haven't seen anything published on anyone been able to do it. SIM's works simular but use and IMEI number instead. The only reason it uses IMEI numbers is because it is a 52 bit number and we are running out of ESN number and they needed a different name for the sim cards.

Vox Dei said:EDGE has nothing to do with WCDMA. It's an upgrade to the data for GSM. It will be discontinued the same time GSM is. The problem with GSM is that you can't discontinue it untill you have noone using it. The good thing with CDMA is that you don't have to discontinue anything to upgrade your system. Everything is backwards compatiable.

When did I say EDGE has anything to do with WCDMA? Oh, I didn't. I specifically said EDGE is GSM. The guy said GSM was dead. I said it's not because EDGE will be used for many many years. It WILL be the lower speed backbone for the UMTS network. Don't come in here all half ****ed when you can't even quote me correctly.

Let me quote then "EDGE and WCDMA were meant to work together." This is not true. No more than TDMA was ment to work with GSM. It's just the next step up in the tech tree. They will continue to use EDGE and GSM for as long as people have them. But if you have WCDMA your phone won't use EDGE at the same time. It will use WCDMA unless it can't find a WCDMA tower then it will use a GSM tower if it has both techs in it (most phones do at the moment). the thing about CDMA is that even if you have a 3x or a EV-DO tower you have a First gen CDMA phone they will still work together.

Vox Dei said:Let me quote then "EDGE and WCDMA were meant to work together." This is not true. No more than TDMA was ment to work with GSM. It's just the next step up in the tech tree. They will continue to use EDGE and GSM for as long as people have them. But if you have WCDMA your phone won't use EDGE at the same time. It will use WCDMA unless it can't find a WCDMA tower then it will use a GSM tower if it has both techs in it (most phones do at the moment). the thing about CDMA is that even if you have a 3x or a EV-DO tower you have a First gen CDMA phone they will still work together.

Hey genius. I never said your EDGE signal and WCDMA signal will work interoperably. Stop trying to say I even im...(continues)

Right now there is not even a phone that will do EDGE and WCDMA. There are phones that do GPRS and WCDMA for data but i phone will not change down to a GSM network if it can get a WCDMA. There are Multiband phones right now such as TMDA/GSM and GSM/WCDMA. As far as i know there are no EDGE/WCDMA phones out but as is the multibands will use the higher technology first and ONLY switch down if they can't find a tower with the the higher technology. EDGE and WCDMA don't even use the same network so the network cannot handoff between WCDMA and EDGE. Multiband phones are all done on the phone. The phone first searches for WCMA and if it can't find it it will search for GSM. If the phone doesn't need the full bandwidth of WCDMA it will not s...(continues)

The reason there aren't that many right now is simple. There are no EDGE/UMTS networks currently. The first one will be Cingular's. Not only that, but ANY UMTS phone that already has gprs, could be retooled for an american version with EDGE.

Not to totally attack GSM, but GSM truely is toast. Saying that EDGE/UMTS were meant to work together is like saying that a GSM/CDMA(EVDO) handset was meant for it. Yes, it can talk to both networks,. but its two networks. When Verizon or Sprint rolls out EV-DO its over their network, the old handsets will work on the new network. When Cingular or T-Mobile or any other GSM carrier loads up their UMTS network the older handsets won't nessecarily work on the new tower due to the frequency difference.Again, what you're saying is obvious, you stick two radios in your phone, EDGE and UMTS, and of course it'll work. But so will a GSM CDMA handset. That's not his point.

hmmm why would sprint or nextel be looking into ev-dv? hmmmmm let me see

nextel uses iden800 iden is a dead end just like gsm, nextel has to reband to the 1900 mhz, oh and wait nextel owns exclusive rights to qchat! qchat which is pure cdma ptt (for you that means push to talk) qchat runs ok on ev-do but still has lag and doesn't give the added voice capacity of ev-do hence the need for ev-dv. it gives huge data speeds amazeing voice capacity and ptt is almost as good as iden

why would sprint want ev-dv? well there ready link will work ok on ev-dv but still not good enough to compeat with iden. sprint wants all of sothernlink and nextels customers.

now qualicom has put there ev-dv development on hold for now you are correct.

You are incorrect, buddy. Sprint has already said NO to ev-dv. Just get over it. You are right that most cdma technologies require a software upgrade, but ev-dv would require a network upgrade. And qchat will work just fine with ev-do. Why would they upgrade the network when they can just go to ev-do rel A and get the same speeds? It's not happening. You are dreaming.

It's not dead. It has just been put on hold by qualcom because noone wants it now that EV-DO rev A is out and does most things EV-DV does and it's cheaper to upgrade. They have said they will start development if there is interest in it again. Chances are that won't happen because of EV-DO but that is just speculation on my part.

let us not forget one thiong about ev-dv. more voice capabilites. right now it is not necissary because all the cdma are no where near there capacity. (unlike a lot of gsm carriers) but as wireless data becomes more and mor epopular espetually eith new ev speeds it will begain to use more of the bandwidth. as this happends there will be a need for ev-do because it will give more voice capacity. but there is one other very cutial point to ev-dv. ev-do does have simalar down stream speeds this is true but upstream currently is just 144 kb/s with ev-dv they can get an upstream of 2.4mb/s.

vox is correct ev-dv is on hold right now because no one is interested. but once there is a need for greater voice capacity or greater upstream speeds you ...(continues)

stevelvl said:vox is correct ev-dv is on hold right now because no one is interested. but once there is a need for greater voice capacity or greater upstream speeds you will see ev-dv development restarted.

This is exactly why ev-dv is dead. Qualcomm dropped out of ev-dv because:ev-do and ev-do rel A are going to hold the fort just fine until 4G starts to roll out.By the time ev-dv is needed, 4G technologies such as OFDM will already be here and then there will be no need for it. Heck, even Super 3G(GSM core technology) is going to hit at 100 mbps. Why in the world do we need a much slower technology like ev-dv when there will be cheaper and better options?Type in ev-dv in a search and you'll fi...(continues)

Great post man. Good to see someone who does a little research.Hey man, did you know that there are TDD variants in existence right now? TD-SCDMA and TD-CDMA are being used in asia right now and they are even compatible with UMTS. Cool huh?

prince84 said:well you are right partially, CDMA phones will drain your battery if you are roaming. GSM dont do that. but in USA CDMA/TDMA is the better choice for south eastern states because of the topography. GSM sinals do not have that much strength in mountains or valleys. Since CDMA use a lower frequency most of the time it will work on mountians/valleys. GSM is used over almost 95% of the world. only a small percentage use CDMA in other counries.

Both systems have their advantages. CDMA has a bit more range in side by side tests and better call capacity. Many of todays CDMA phones have the ability to roam not only on other CDMA networks (800 & 1900) they can still use the analog (amps) network. That allows use in more areas of the US for now. What is best is just what works better in your area. Here in Austin , TX. CDMA drops fewer calls (Verizon, Sprint) than GSM (Cingular, T-Mobile) I sell all the carriers and have found this to be true in THIS area. Where you live may be different.

Well said, Cain. It really depends on the person who is using it.GSM as the more mature technoplogy will have more phone based options. Phones cost less in general and it is a less expensive way to build a lot of coverage in a hurry.CDMA on the other hand has much more capacity than GSM, faster data rates and is backward compatible clear to analog which is a huge advantage in a rural market.All things being equal CDMA is less likely to drop a call during handoff to another tower than GSM. In the United States CDMA is much more prevalent than GSM. There are only 2 nationwide GSM carriers, Cingular and T-Mobile while there are 3 major CDMA carriers, Verizon, Sprint and Alltel. Also most regional carriers like U.S. Cellular, Cricket, Me...(continues)

YOU SAY YOU DO NOT HAVE A OPINION EITHER WAY BUT WHY DO YOU ALWAYS THROW YOURSELF INTO GSM AND CDMA WARS. WE ALL KNOW BY NOW YOU THINK GSM IS THE $HIT. WHO CARES ANYWAYS CUSTOMERS DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE DIFFRENCE IS I USED TO TELL THEM GSM RAN OFF OF SATELITES...THEY DONT CARE JUST AS LONG AS IT MAKES A PHONE CALL.

No. of rural/regional carriers that offer GSM vs CDMA does not equal rural coverage so your point if it is true ( I doubt it) is irrelevant. What constitutes a major company Cain? Are major companys only the ones that have merged to form bigger companies in the past 5 years like VZW (BAM, Primeco, Airtouch, GTE), Cingular (Cing & ATT), or soon to be Sprint/Nextel. Alltel while spotty on the West Coast covers many rural areas in the Midwest, South, and Southwest. The fact of the matter is there is much more coverage and the capacity, data speed advantage, fewer dropped calls, etc with CDMA which is why more carriers in the US are using it and if the current proposed mergers finalize then over 120 million customers will use it as opposed to ...(continues)

I would go with GSM. For the simple reason of CDMA claims that they have like twice or three times more abilities than GSM, especially when it comes to data speeds. The network simply doesn't preform up to their claims. Go with what the world says.

How does that make sense? I'm trying to argue, but go with what the world says despite better data speeds??? Oh God. It's VHS over Beta again. Let's just go with what everyone uses instead of what's better!!

Qualcomm is also churning out millions of MSM6500 chipsets, all 3G EVDO ready. Lucent is preparing for a market trial for its 4G VoIP system with EVDO, another smaller company already is in market trials for CDMA 4G. And the GSM carriers are still flirting with how to launch 3G. They're almost a generation behind. How do you call that losing?

I call it losing, because tat for tat, cdma is inferior to GSM. CDMAone was inferior to GSM. GSM STILL has the best voice quality available in wireless today. Less warble than CDMA or any of it's different versions. CDMA2000 really only tackles GSM in the capacity dept. The call quality is still not as good as the GSM voice call.EDGE is superior to CDMA2000 1x in data speeds. Funny because 2000 1x is listed as a 3G technology. CDMA2000 is inferior to UMTS in terms of bandwidth, capacity, and voice/data capabilties.Currently EV-DO has greater data capabilities than UMTS, but is really a data supplement for CDMA2000. The supplement for UMTS is HSDPA and is also designed by your beloved Lucent. Lucent designed the chips that will al...(continues)

No, that is not true CainMarko. It's based on business. One example is GLIDE, developed by 3DFX, the best 3D rendering engine to date. Better than DiretX, but Nvidia bought them out and closed the doors on the project. We have no idea when or if Nvidia will intergrate GLIDE into their new boards.

exactly my point. some technologies that are "better" on paper, don't get public support for various reasons. so, my point is this: what good is a technology that isn't being USED? NADA. if it's not used, it doesn't make lives easier, so there is no advantage. Sony was able to prove several times that betamax was superior. The sega saturn was "technically" superior to every game machine. The thing that "makes or breaks" a technology isn't based on numbers alone. If the technology is too expensive or too difficult for developers to implement, then it will never be "mainstream". This was the case for Sony's Beta, Sega's Saturn, and qualcomm's CDMA. CDMA can claim "superiority" all it wants, but in the end it's the public who decides whether or...(continues)

To carriers who have to make a decision on what system to deploy, CDMA has proven to offer the most capacity per sector, the highest data rates on the market, the most efficient use of spectrum, the cheapest to implement, and the easiest for system performance and optimization due to co-channel allocation in adjacent sectors. All the other GSM carriers went GSM because either the government mandated it, they implemented GSM before CDMA came into full swing, or they blindly went with what Europe was doing despite doing it poorly. Spread Spectrum CDMA not only has 3G fully deployed, but are in market trials for 4G. On every single merit, it is the better technology and is spreading to the rest of the world, most noteably in China, India, Afric...(continues)

CDGIII said:All the other GSM carriers went GSM because either the government mandated it, they implemented GSM before CDMA came into full swing, or they blindly went with what Europe was doing despite doing it poorly.

Ok. For a minute there, I actually thought you might know what you were talking about, but that statement ALONE makes your entire history go through the toilet. GSM was mandated in EUROPE. They DID know that CDMA was coming, but they chose GSM. WHY? Because they were looking into the future. Did GSM have trouble launching in Europe? Yes... they had a BETTER RECORD than Sprint's first few years and VZW's first Year. You seem to forget something... CDMA became popular in the US for ONE rea...(continues)

First of all, I have no idea what they teach sales reps and marketting people in training classes. Where I have been to many engineering classes offered by Dr. Ernest Simo himself, I have never seen the training materials you are referring to. I made analogies completely of my own in order to illustrate a point. While your arguements are argumentative, they are ONLY that. I used the Christmas vs Chanukah example to illustrate to the numerous CSR's here, which may or may not have the technical understanding of how the systems work, that while I am telling you how the CDMA systems work, you are pulling out the most irrelevant arguements that could be made. I talk about the benefits of power control, of spread spectrum technologies, of multi-pa...(continues)

And to further illustrate your ignorance, capacity is probably the #1 factor for a wireless carrier in deciding what technology to implement. What overhead/operational costs does a wireless carrier have, besides its payroll? It's towers! It's network! The money it has bid to the FCC for spectrum. So the biggest decision a wireless carrier has to make is, what technology allows me to make the most amount of money in return for the money I have spent? To answer that, you have to know where your money (income) is coming from? users making calls. So, in order to get the most amount of money for the money I have invested, I want a wireless system that can support the most number of users per tower I put up and per spectrum I have purchased. THAT'...(continues)

You wan't to attack me because of something you can't disprove. You want to make it seem like your technical knowledge somehow makes you better. You have said yourself that you have no clue how GSM works. You do happen to know CDMA but you keep comparing it to GSM technologies that existed 2 years ago. The reason I say you are just quoting the training manual is because of the simple fact that you're just quoting the capabilities of CDMA in general. These are the same numbers and stats that even customer service reps learn in training. Basic stuff man. Oh and about the "warble", it's a fact man. You seem to be pretty pissy that you can't disprove it.... I also noticed that you shut up real quick in one of your other posts. In the VZW room, y...(continues)

Cain, throughout numerous posts I have compliment you. I have said that, for someone in marketting, you do have a better grasp on these things work than most I have encountered. You, on the other hand, are quite incapable of showing anything but absolute loathing. I have disproven Warble. I stated quite flat out with no dispute from you that Warble is a condition that exists with all digital technologies when the signal fades to nothing. No matter what you do, that is the very essence of how digital technologies work. You either get Warble in digital, or you get static in AMPS. And you did not refute it. I even stated and illustrated for those spectating that to even make an arguement of "warble" is such a minor issue in wireless that it doe...(continues)

CDGIII said:Responses in BOLDCain, throughout numerous posts I have compliment you. I have said that, for someone in marketting, you do have a better grasp on these things work than most I have encountered. You, on the other hand, are quite incapable of showing anything but absolute loathing. I don't loathe anyone, I just don't like the fact that you like to think your scientific knowledge makes your opinion matter more than someone who can read the same info you read. I have disproven Warble. come again? I stated quite flat out with no dispute from you that Warble is a condition that exists with all digital technologies when the signal fades to nothing. No matter what you do, that is the very esse

NEVER did I say that that my opinion matters more. NOT ONCE have I even elluded to that, so once again, wrong.

Sorry, but the industry is not debating warble. It's a red-herring.

So, Cingular plans to be 3G by 2007. Ok, I can say with confidence that VZW will be in advance planning stages for 4G by the time Cingular's deployment of 3G is complete. My point is that no one yet knows exactly what 4G standard is going to be adopted. No one. By 2007, release A will be a memory and we'll be looking into VoIP networks, but no decision has been made. And three years ago, yes we knew about EVDO, but they hadn't decided that was the next course of action.

This is what I'm talking about: "that may be true, but you code guys have never and will...(continues)

CDGIII said:responses in bold...againNEVER did I say that that my opinion matters more. NOT ONCE have I even elluded to that, so once again, wrong. You have publicly told people not too listen to what I was saying based SOLEY on what YOU were saying. if that doesn't equate to you thinking your words mean more than mine, then i don't know what would.

Sorry, but the industry is not debating warble. It's a red-herring. voice quality is not a red herring. warble is only a part of overall voice quality, but it is A part.

So, Cingular plans to be 3G by 2007. Ok, I can say with confidence that VZW will be in advance planning stages for 4G by the time Cingular's deployment of 3G is complete. <
>

2) If you are so convinced that Warble is a major issue, how do you measure it? How do you quantify it?

3) The full nationwide deployment of EVDO is scheduled for completion by end of year 2005. Given possible schedule slips for unforseen reasons, let's say it's done 1Q06. That's still one year ahead of Cingular.

4) Wrong again, and this time you should know that EVDV is NOT an evolutionary step to EVDO. Most CDMA carriers had to choose between EVDO and EVDV. Those that chose EVDO, which is looking to be ALL the CDMA carriers, will never adopt EVDV and everyone in the industry is looking at EVDV to be still-born.

5) Thank you again for illustrating in bold that you are not interested in truth or fact. You d...(continues)

CDGIII said:responses in boldfirst of all... you don't offer any "back up" you are spewing the same info that CDMA marketing guys try to sell.

1) Wrong again.No...NOT wrong. You said SPECIFICALLY not to listen to me because your opinion was apparently "better"

2) If you are so convinced that Warble is a major issue, how do you measure it? How do you quantify it? I never said that it was EASY to "quantify"( you know that there is no "Voice-o-meter", but throw out the fact that GSM has consitently scored better REVIEWS on audio quality). But voice quality is measured in SEVERAL ways(echo, terminal coupling loss[this is on the phone itself], end path delay[the delays caused by voice encodin

Well Cain & CDGIII...I've heard you guys go back and forth with all your info...and it's been good info...I've really learned a lot from you guys over the past few weeks! But setting all the technical stuff aside, I recently had the luxury of testing a CDMA phone (Verizon, LG-4500) and a GSM phone (T-Mobile-Samsung E105) side-by-side to see which was better...signal wise where I live (most important), call quality wise, and audio quality. Now granted, I'm not as knowledgable as you guys as far as CDMA or GSM, but here is what I observed as a regular/average "everyday" user.GSM-Sorry CDGIII, here's where I have to give one to Cain. Being as I've always owned CDMA, I thought and still do believe the sound and voice quality is good, but no...(continues)

Thank you Chris for chiming in. The differences between talking in a quiet room and a loud environment is a function of exactly what Cain and I are debating. It's the differences in the variable-rate "vocoders". What Cain has missed (he must have or he would've been all over me for it) is that, from what I've read about GSM, their vocoders do EXACTLY what you described, but are not as good as gating off loud noise environments. In most cases, it is a trade off you have to live with. But that was a great test.

Now we could both poke a thousand and one holes in your testing. He'll ask you to try it again using Cingular. I'll tell you that the LG4500 is probably the most trouble-some handset we've seen in a long time. And while your test met...(continues)

Thanks for your reply and explanation. Just a couple of things...the 4500 is actually quite a nice phone, one of the best sounding, more user friendly handset's I've used. For CDMA I have been given feedback it has provided better voice quality than previous handset's I've owned through Verizon. Good battery life and connectivity as well. Also more than 1 friend stated the GSM handset was better...it was several friend's I called. But they all did comment on the amount of the noise level in the background. So I'd say in the end, more than 3/4's of the people I called stated they would rather put up with a little less voice quality in the CDMA and be able to "hear" my voice, rather than hearing a bunch of loud noise in the background....(continues)

I'm just kind of curious what kind of Siemens phone your friend has. A56? Every time I hear complaints about voice quality on a GSM phone, it's ALWAYS on a cheap "freebie" phone and every time I hear about how good a CDMA phone is, it's on a high dollar phone. The only real exception to this is a Nokia. Nokia makes a damn good product no matter how much it costs. The phone plays a VERY important part of voice quality. CDMA phones are SO expensive to make, that manufacturers skimp on other things in the phone(like features and quality). Also, did you bother calling from a CDMA phone while you were at the carousel? I would bet that the same problem would happen. My brother-in-law has an LG from US Cellular and I hear background noise all the t...(continues)

Fair enough Cain. Yes, you might be right on the model of Siemens he has. I plan to after the 1st of the year try out a Cingular phone. I'm interested in a model that would be a tri or quad band. I'm not necessarity interested in a camera phone...I was looking at the Nokia 3100/3120 becuase it's tri-mode (for Europe), but does not have a camera. Had the V180 through T-Mobile, thought the phone was kinda cheap. But am willing to have a camera phone if it performs better. If you have any suggestions it would be much appreciated. Also, was reading somewhere that some GSM model's you can switch-on a "noise cancellation" thing...or something! Sorry, the tech name eludes me at the moment. Do you know of any phone models that have that in G...(continues)

You are my hero, how do I work for you and eventually take your job? I already work for VZW in CS but have a degree in TV and radio engineering.

Thought it was a few years ago, I had the opportunity to use both technologies side by side for months. I originally had a Sprint TP2100. Worked fine for me as a first cell phone. Got reception in the concrete and below grade basement of the house I grew up in. I once had a 320 minute phone call on it while in the basement with 1-2 bars of reception and never plugged it in. ( I'm aware the "bars" are quite subjective as well though ) Later I was wooed to GSM by the T68i. No service in the basement at all. This was likely a carrier issue though since it was a somewhat rural area. Later I move to ...(continues)

Very similar experience to you and the previous guy. I used to have a GSM phone and after having a CDMA phone I wouldn't dream of going back to GSM. Sound quality doesn't matter when the phone doesn't work. Another thing I noticed with GSM is going to OSU football games there were so many people (roughly an extra 200,000+ people on a home game day in a 3 block radius) in one area there was basically no service. It seemed like the signal was split so thin between all the phones that it was useless. I'm not a technical buff for cell phones so I don't know the explanation of it but with sprint I have absolutely no problem what so ever. I can be standing next to my sister who has Cingular and she can't use her phone, and if she can it's ch...(continues)

I am leaving the office to test in the field, and I don't plan on wasting my time-off this weekend to debate this.

I'll simply point out that you have conveniently missed the point of the topic of discussion, Cain. You have time and time again argued the strengths of UMTS vs the strengths of CDMA. When you talk about time-slotting a wideband CDMA signal, you are specifically talking about UMTS vs CDMA, UMTS being a technology you have yet to roll out. Look at the very first post. It asks, "Which is better? GSM or CDMA?"

CDGIII said:I am leaving the office to test in the field, and I don't plan on wasting my time-off this weekend to debate this.

I'll simply point out that you have conveniently missed the point of the topic of discussion, Cain. You have time and time again argued the strengths of UMTS vs the strengths of CDMA. When you talk about time-slotting a wideband CDMA signal, you are specifically talking about UMTS vs CDMA, UMTS being a technology you have yet to roll out. Look at the very first post. It asks, "Which is better? GSM or CDMA?"

I guess you are forgetting that UMTS is a GSM "branded" product. If we follow your logic then we have to find out WHICH of the several cdma technologies you a...(continues)

I thought you were educated, Cain? You keep reminding us of your bonuses!! How do you not know that EV-DV is not only NOT a CDMA "standard", but that it is not even deployed nor will it ever be. How many times do I have to tell you that EVDV is dead, much like the three brain cells you used to have in your head. What we had been comparing was the airlink of GSM to the airlink of CDMA. And what I'VE been arguing from the very first posting in this thread has been IS-95B. I haven't even been arguing IS-2000. I haven't even been arguing data rates either, although you seem to be quite adept at trying to steer the conversation in that direction. Sorry, Cain, you lost this one. But don't worry. Just post another "Cingular development guys are con...(continues)

CDGIII said:I thought you were educated, Cain? You keep reminding us of your bonuses!! How do you not know that EV-DV is not only NOT a CDMA "standard", but that it is not even deployed nor will it ever be. How many times do I have to tell you that EVDV is dead, much like the three brain cells you used to have in your head. What we had been comparing was the airlink of GSM to the airlink of CDMA. And what I'VE been arguing from the very first posting in this thread has been IS-95B. I haven't even been arguing IS-2000. I haven't even been arguing data rates either, although you seem to be quite adept at trying to steer the conversation in that direction. Sorry, Cain, you lost this one. But don't worry. Just post another "

You for got one thing. Upgrade ability. Everything is backwards capatible. The oldest CDMA phones can uses the newest EV-DO towers and the newest flashiest EV-DO phones can still use the towers that haven't been upgraded. TDMA phones do not work on GSM towers or viceversa makeing the GSM providers keep two networks operational while they spend billions trying to upgrade phones (not counting AMPS because both have to keep that one up so we take that out of the equation). The other thing is GSM (don't argue because i've seen the tech specs) have a hard cap on range that is based on the time delay between tower and phone (yes it's very small but the computer picks it up) and once the phone hits that hard cap it will hard handoff the phone w...(continues)

And if I may add my 2 cents... Many studies have shown that Verizons voice network works better than most other carriers... I will not dispute that fact... but given that AWS and Cingular both upgraded their entire network to a completely different technology, while at the same time keeping pace with Verizon and launching the largest digital data network in the US, I find it hard for anyone to doubt the power of GSM... also, while Cingular was doing all of this, Verizon was spending most of its energies on voice alone... that's why their data coverage lacks as far behind as it does... if Cingular would have been GSM from day one, Verizon would have been number 2 a long time ago...

Still, in today's modern age of wireless data, over 95% of all total revenue is generated by voice; not data. So why would anyone in position to make a decision on where to invest the money choose to favor data over voice? It makes no financial sense. And while I have no idea what Cingular's total data footprint is, the reality is that wireless data networks, as of today, are primarilly a function of urban markets. There are not a lot of farmers and shepards looking for data coverage while tending the flock, and even if they were, the exact nature of a rural market would make investment of data infrastructure a red-ink operation. So I can't fault a company for deciding to instead concerntrate on it's voice capacity in as large an area as pos...(continues)

Secondly, CDMA or GSM doesn't matter. Provider matters. For me, I've been able to have a single almost any where in the U.S. with my cell phone. I've been from East Coast to West Coast and in the middle of a corn field in Illionois checking my email on my laptop thru my Verizon Cell...when most people could not even get a signal.

I have, consistently, had a signal in areas where my non-verizon (usually Cingular, T-mobile, or some other GSM line) have no signal.

And very few of us are in international business travelling the world. I think the fact that Verizon has been able to grow and offer such great coverage compared to all the GS...(continues)

never said it WASN'T cdma (although it's as different as apples and oranges). I was saying that the ITU is recommending that ALL narrowband carriers (ie Sprint PCS and VZW) switch to WCDMA which is what Cingular is using.

This debate is based on which is better, not who will win. Both will stay alive till one is faded out. Considering the cost involved for each... not for awhile.

Every news article I read is basing the new technology on data speed, I finally have an EDGE phone in and I'm waiting for the new EV-DO phone to arrive. The reason for the delay for the EV-DO is the carrier's testing of the phone.

That's what they said about BETA. you are still missing the point. What good is a technology if no one uses it? Does ev-do have better data speeds than edge? yes. will it have better data speeds than HSDPA? nope. the end of the argument is based on who has what. If more customers use GSM, it doesn't matter if CDMA is better.

hey I think you need to look at that info again. There are 1.25 BILLION GSM customers... Expected to increase to 1.5 BILLION by year's end. You are totally incorrect here. CDMA=13% of the world's wireless market. GSM makes up 72%.

Yeah, I went to http://www.gsm.org and they have the numbers, but they don't add up. In the US, Cingular(including AT&T Wireless) 48 million and T-Mobile about between 5 and 10 million customers are the only users in the US totalling close to 60 million subscribers. The other 127 million far exceeds the total number of citizens in Canada.

If it's about the number of units activated or build... than here's a site with all the CDMA2000 1x phones.

When a Cell technology becomes a standard than I'll jump onto it. Based on the Country's Antitrust laws, there will always be the two types of technology to keep the competition going and jobs building and maintaining the towers. A...(continues)

Mexico has been and always will be part of North America. I don't know where you get your info. I know the CDG does not include mexico as a part of North America, but according to the GSMA, North America makes up 16% of the GSM market total world-wide. GSM currently has 1.25 BILLION+. so, 16 percent of that is?... 200 million currently...

There are more CDMA towers in the US, between Sprint, Verizon and Altel, all of them with newly signed roaming agreements, that is a pretty big footprint. Europe is starting to use WCDMA as a replacement for it's GSM as is Cingular here. GSM is behind CDMA in the technology curve, not to mention sound quality, and CDMA phones don't make noise when you get near a radio.

I'm curious to know where you get your info. GSM is the newest technology out there when it comes to mobile phones. And there isno doubt it is better than CDMA. More secure connection, better call quality, and the SIM card technology...there is not topping that.

Yes. CDMA has better capacity. GSM has better voice quality. This is an often misleading statistic, because GSM has yet to be put to full capacity. There is "headroom" in BOTH cdma AND gsm networks. They were designed that way.

CDMA also uses it slots like cable internet, if the network is congested the highest quality of calls being placed on a tower is that of the worst signal. If you have the most expensive phone and i have the crapiest, and your at the prime reception point for that call and i'm two floors below the surface in a parkade just barly recieving a signal, your call is just as good as mine. Its called "Noise floor" on the same note GSM is using a dedicated slot. There may only be 8 time slots, but each one doesnt affect any other calls on that tower.

Under 2c, CDMA will enter slotted mode when it is sitting idle. That means the handset effectively sleeps when it is not receiving a page from the base station. It wakes up in an assigned time slot to check if there are any calls, or messages it needs to update. This saves battery power. While in conversation, the handset sets it's vocoder to full rate when the user is actively talking. If the user is listening, the vocoder will reduce transmition to 1/8th rate, so as to not transmit background noise, and to save battery lif...(continues)

You know it is funny because if you listen to what Rich and other people have stated Cingular is converting to WCDMA then going beyond. GSM has one benefit. It allows you to move from phone to phone without calling anyone due to the SIM card.

As a consumer GSM sounds great for phone book transferring but it also allows for a vulnerable spot on theft. GSM has no way to lock out anyone stealing your phone and using it with their sim card so people are more likely to steal a GSM phone than a CDMA phone which if reported stolen does that person no good in most cases.

GSM also has more to deal with when it comes to issues. You have to make sure the sim is not registering wrong and also if the phone is messed up. You also have delays becau...(continues)

GSM is more Popular world wide... Over a Billion, and CDMA (250 Million)

There... I'm done

Actually it's NOT over... see the problem is that your facts are just WRONG. "More calls per channel" doesn't necessarily mean "better capacity"... network capacity isn't measured that way. Network capacity is measured in Erlangs....GSM offers more erlangs per sector. GSM also currently offers FASTER data speeds... EDGE is the fastest data connection available nation wide. And only VZW claims they have fewer dropped calls.... There... you ARE ...(continues)

edge=NATION WIDE= fastest NATION WIDEEV-DO=14 cities= 1xRTT much slower in every other city

Who friggin cares if you are faster in 14 cities if your data speeds are turtle paced in every other city....? we're talking about the entire nation. EDGE is the FASTEST Nationally Available data service in the US.

This in no way says who's better.It only gives my experience with cell phones.1 year agoI started with spint.Then AT&T,then Cingular.I keep each one for trial.Then went with verizon.I travel around 30,000 miles a year mainly in Michigan.As for less dropped calls,verizon won.Signal coverage,verizon won.Hands down.But Cingular did have 2'nd best coverage area.Notscientific evidence.Just my experience.My sister had Cingular for 2 years.Had her try verizon last Christmas.She says,no comparisonverizon won.Coverage area.Also Michigan area.My cousin owns 2 trucks.Drives one of them.Drives all over Michigan.He can only comparewith sprint.He said that they were a joke.Coverage wise that is.Verizon much better.Now I'm not saying veri...(continues)

I would have to say GSM is better. CDMA can be faster in data transmission at times, but it isn't nearly as consistent. Also, GSM is clearer. I have had and sold both. I am very happy with my GSM phone, especially since our network is growing.

Now i have to say that GSM is better. With that said you have to remember that the original version of CDMA is so old that it was use in the Vietnam war. Making it one of the oldest codecs out there that is still in use today. TDMA is antiquated with no doubt. I mean the name its self Time Division Multiple Access tells you that is getting outdated.Now as i said these are my opinions no offense to any one. Judson

Why does everybody always think newer is better? Im not gonna argue as too which is better Im a rep. I sell both, both hace advantages, everyone has done a pretty good job pointing them all out. Anyway maybe the fact that CDMA roots from the vietnam era where it was used for data transfer only if im not mistakin. Could be proof that the technology has benn tested and prooven over time. besides both technologies are ever changeing.

More people in the world speak Chinese Mandarin than any other language, does that mean it's superior to other languages? Of course not. The worldwide number of subscribers doesn't mean anything. It's the quality of network and customer service in your particular locale. Who cares what people in Europe use if I don't go there?

Why don't you tell us what your favorite gummy bear flavor is too, while you're at it.

If you're going to delve into the pointless, childish, never-ending "GSM vs. CDMA" debate, at least try to support your opinion with some facts upon which to base it. This would be more helpful than resorting to shoolyard-style argumentation.

TALK TO ANY CING. CUST VS US CELLULAR OR VERIZON ---MAYBE (THATS MAYBE) IF ONLY GSM SIGNAL WAS AVAILABLE IT WOULD BE BETTER BUT THEN ONLY ONE CHOICE WOULD BE AVAILABLE. GAIT PHNS ARE SLIGHTLY BETTER BUT CDMA ROCKS 4 SURE!!!!!

I am a former Verizon customer (3yrs). In the year and a half that I've had Cingular, the service that I've had has been comparable. I honestly couldn't say that either one has provided better service than the other. Considering that I prefer the phones that Cingular offers/supports, AND I like having rollover daytime minutes, I don't know why I would ever want to return to Verizon. It's really nothing personal against them, though

PS - I used to be one of those people who wouldn't use anything that wasn't Motorola (a habit I picked up as a Verizon customer). I carried that tendency over to Cingular, and later found that, on average, most Nokias and Sony Ericssons get better quality reception more consistently than anything...(continues)

they still got CDMA? lol. To the end user GSM wins hands down. SIM cards that store your phone numbers and all your contacts. PHONE VERSITILATY!! CDMA you are stuck to your carriers phone selection. You have to call them to activate a different carriers phone and they can decide whether or not to do it. with GSM, if you have the phone unlocked all you have to do is put your sim card in and VOILA! no calls to the carrier at all. Have to give it to GSM.

Well....CDMA EV-DO way faster. Latest RCR News..."Cingular not worried about catching up to Verizon dats speeds" Shocker. GSM is old. CDMA is advancing. Do your homework, more countries around the world are starting to switch to CDMA. Now if Verizon would only stop being dumb asses and let thier phones be unlocked...god that pisses me off. You spend a crap load on a phone with memmory cards and you can't use any of it. very weak....even as a employee....

Someone (I think Kent German) wrote about technology and its evolution at the CNet site. An excerpt: "...Generally speaking, CDMA carriers have better coverage in the United States, GSM service has a larger global footprint (it's the standard in Europe, for example....."

Wireless Consultant said:I personaly use in South Florida Cingular, TMobile, Verizon and Sprint PCS. From my experience CDMA is more advanced and has better voice quality.GSM has bigger selection of phones.

.......... Lorna says ............................................. ...I have heard that Verizon has great coverage/reception, but I fear that getting a BlueTooth phone to upload/send photo files from the phone to my iMac G4 might be blocked.

Is there any Verizon customer out there who is able to use BlueTooth to send photo files straight to their own computers? Or does Verizon disable their BT phones so that customers have to use Verizon supported websites or pay monthly fees?

No. they don't block using your phone as a modem what they block is using your phone to transfer files between your computer and your phone. So you cannot transfer pictues or ringtones to your phone from your computer. This is for a number of reasons not the least of which they can control the content that goes on your phone and they can charge you fees to put that content on your phone. Most content that goes on your phone is copywrited so you have to pay for it or it is illegal. The other thing is there are viruses that can affect Verizon's network and be damaging to it. So the real reason they block this is because they can.

Okay, I'm going to try and clarify this here, sorry if it was, but there is a tun of replys.

Currently the world standard is GSM (Voice) AND GPRS (Data) Which runs using TDMA. EDGE is a upgrade of GPRS and runs on the same network.

Now, CDMA is the next gen up, thats correct. Currently there are two major networks on CDMA.

EV-DO Verison and Sprint

Now this is not what the world is moving to in CDMA and WCDMA.

The world is moving to: UMTS/HSDPA

Now, this is what Cingular/AT&T are working to. The reason for most phones only being GSM and GPRS/EDGE capable is that only 20 major cities use CDMA right now in cingular. They plan for the next year or so to encompass all of their network with both systems.

As far as why V and S have reached CDMA tech first is not because they are better, its because they have smaller networks to mannage. (lest costs and less time spent updating.) They will also still be just as limited in the future regarding the next gen internationally.

Smaller networks??

Verizon's network is much more efficient in terms of processing more calls per channel. The HSDPA speeds that have been reported have been under test scenarios. Rev a is already in the works for EVDO so it will be interesting to see how these match up in terms of speed...

GSM and CDMA are both extremely good and both have there advantages and disadvantages. There is no true winner since basically the network regardless of CDMA or GSM is all based on a consumer. Although there is one interesting fact, is GSM was in the lead when 2G technology was released with data speeds and call quality. Now that 3G was here YES CDMA is better.

This the the kicker though...4G is a hybrid of a GSM technology and CDMA carriers will need to upgrade to the 4G GSM technology while GSM carriers will have a much easier time rolling out 4G and will most likely perform better. Hence why Cingular and Sprint were at the 4G conference with some major European companies. CDMA and its possibilities are not endless however GSM is endles...(continues)

I think both technologies have their strengths and weaknesses. CDMA has the ability to roam easily onto analog networks, which gives the advantage of greater voice coverage nationwide, while GSM has better coverage globally.

CDMA will handle more calls at the same time while GSM has better voice quality. CDMA will work better with little or weak signal but GSM usually works better in metal buildings and in wooded areas.

I say the best carrier to have is one that has pricing and plans that suit your own personal needs. The best thing as far as coverage is to check which one works best where you work and live and will be using it the most. That service will be the one that's truly best.

will people stop saying gsm is insecure because someone can pop in their sim card in use, incase any cdma fan does not know, GSM PHONES USE A IMEI NUMBER which is identified on the network soon as someone turns in the phone, if my GSM phone which i proudly use, is stolen i can call cingular and ask them to blacklist the IMEI number(i think they do it automatically if the phone is stolen or lost). BLocking the IMEI number effectively making the phone a paperweight, no sim card will get the phone to work at all.

To the best of my knowlegde the encryption process GSM uses on voice communications has never been effectively "broken" at least not in such a way that its easy to decode the conversation without knowing the IMSI

From what I read it can be but you have to have very sophisticated equipment and you need to be very close within the same range as the tower to the phone. So if you get handed of to another tower you lose the conversation so unless you are stationary it isn't that easy to keep a conversation.

I doubt without the IMSI that it could be decoded real-time, most likly you would have to record the digital traffic and then run it through some sort of decryption preccess that could take quite a bit longer.

could be its not worth it to me. You don't know what you could here after all that work. But the government does listen to conversations all the time. And from what I read GSM is easier to listen to then CDMA. It could be entirely wrong just what I read and heard!

if the govt wanted to listen to cell phone conversations, they wouldnt be able to pick it up over the air, its far more convienient to pick up the conversation at the switch after it has passed thru filters and other things

Any all digital phone is going to be fairly secure. The problem with security is when you're on analog. Analog cellular conversations can be easily listened in on by someone with very little know how. The reason being that analog transmits actual voice over radio waves while digital transmits a series of zeros and ones which must be deciphered by the appropriate device at the other end.

Does that blacklist only work for the cingular network or is it a worldwide blacklist? If it only blacklists cingular that does some good but other people can still use it on another network. If that lists is shared between companies, then that is a big deal. Otherwise it would still allow a person to steal but force them to sell it to a subscriber to a different one that it was blacklisted on. I'm not not arguing which one is better, just trying to better inform myself.

And this is easily circumvented by calling whatever provider you are using w/ the stolen phone and saying you purchased it on eBay or at a pawn shop. They will then turn it back on and be done with it. Not GSM hating, as I have Cingular and love it, but it is the truth.

My big problem with GSM (Pardon me if this has already been mentioned.) is the obnoxious noise that every GSM phone causes to come from any sensitive audio devices within a 2-3 foot (1 meter) radius. This includes land-line phones especially speaker phones, head-sets, powered speakers, etc. This sound occurs when the phone checks in with the towers, and when making or receiving a call. It's not the audio from the phone call, but a staccato buzzing sound that's louder the closer the GSM phone is to the audio device. Essentially, the radio transmission from the phone is strong enough to be picked by the amplifier circuitry and output through the audio device's speakers. It interferes with about half of the calls I make on my land-line pho...(continues)

You appear to speak with the voice of authority. Are you a repair technician or a designer?

I have a Motorolly V-180 and my wife has a Nokia 6010, both with Cingular. Both phones cause the buzzing. Are these models noted for poor design?Are there GSM models that you would recommend as being free of this problem?

I have never really had much problem with either. I had GSM service (Cingular, Cell One) for the past 5 years. I have recently switched to Verizons CDMA and thus far am very satisfied. As far as call quality and signal strength it has been about equal. But as far as data speeds and overall satisfaction of the product and service I would have to lean towards CDMA. But im still early into the CDMA world.

I know what network T-mobile and AT&T operate. T-mobile and AT&T are going to do HSPA with the HSDPA and HSUPA, which is a lot better than most of the DO (CDMA EV-DO) offerings out there. The next level on that WCDMA offering is Evolved HSPA, Internet HSPA, HSOPA, and of course LTE. Did you mean Verizon? If so, CDMA does not have a very good data platform roadmap going forward and Verizon does not have any plans yet to do some kind of 3G/4G offering, especially not until the 700 MHz auction is over. Maybe after that, they might have some kind of plan. CDMA (They) just have REV A (deployed now), REV B, REV C, UMB, and Scalable Bandwidth EV-DO. (Combining the carriers and spectrum together to form high-speed data)

All of what is being said may be true. But all that is talk for FUTURE plans. I live in the present and therefore for me at this very moment the CDMA network is providing better service than the GSM did. I understand this is subject to change as well as I am subject to switch carriers when that time comes.

I actually talked about this in many forums out there including the Sprint forum saying HSDPA VS EV-DO. Please go look. WCDMA uses the similar processes that CDMA does. Some differences. Radio channels are 5 MHz with WCDMA but with 1.25 MHz with CDMA. Others are more technical. They both allow for more users to be on the network and higher bandwidth and speeds.

CDMA;Scalable Bandwidth EV-DO. (Basically utilizes all of the spectrum to offer more carriers to allow more speeds on both the down and the up. provides more capacity too) 46mb/s up 27mb/s down.

I wanted to say on a side note that those speeds I mentioned could also increase with software upgrades and more spectrum per carrier being issued. Of course would we ever see those high speeds? Probably not. Could come close depending on the right circumstances. Any questions please do not hesitate to ask. Glad you are cleared up.

I'm not sure if this question can be answered or is even relevant (if its not jus say its not relevant) but i keep hearing about that wavelength auction coming up and I'm just curious, change cell phone services? I know that auction will change a lot but not sure what.

The FCC made a rule with that 700 MHz auction that the winner needs to have one third of the airwaves to be open to any device on any network. Verizon is challenging that in Court and Google, Apple, and others are not and agree with the FCC. The Broadcasters are being asked by the government to sell the spectrum so that they can auction it to be able to obtain billions of dollars into the treasury. There are some things you can do with 700 MHz but there are some cons. Some pros are that you can do CDMA, Wimax, and other technologies. Another pro is that the in-building coverage/penetration is so much better than 800, 1.9 GHz and further up the band. A con would be that it could be very expensive to deploy the spectrum and that the data speed...(continues)